327

Men are always looking. And most guys always think they have a chance, no matter how unlikely or inappropriate the situation. There is no where in particular you can go to meet someone special. If there was, everybody would be there. Besides, the randomness is part of the fun. So don't rule out the gym, or the hotel lobby, although I would feel way more dirty trying to hook up in the hotel lobby.

How is the midget able to look down people's shirts? What an intrepid little fellow... Sorry to give you such a hard time about it. It's just that women who expect guys to be sexually inert, in situations when that may not be reasonable to expect from a guy, are kind of a pet peeve of mine. And if you think the staring situation is uncomfortable for you, try being him. His mom or his friends probably told him to go to the gym because he'd meet girls there. I'm just trying to explain where the other side might be coming from because they, by and large, aren't creeps and they aren't hurting anyone-- even if it is really annoying.

It varies, but sometimes it really is crowded. The 6 got crowded too. Euclid Ave has a disproportionate share of social service agencies whose clients use RTA extensively. I use the health line about twice per week average and it's rarely SRO. But sometimes it can feel like SRO when it's not because of the interior design. The layout is bewildering, and seats next to people of above-average width are effectively neutralized. So people glance back and just decide to stand, which clogs the skinny aisle, which causes even more people to stand.

Is the first glance a problem, or just the prolonged staring? Exchanging glances is a common way to initiate contact, whether the initiator is ugly or shy or none of those things. There's nothing innately offensive about it. But sometimes a guy gets such a hostile "you're creepy" return glance from the girl that actual staring commences not out of attraction but out of spite. Of course, smiling back at an unwanted initial glance would send the wrong message. But there's no need to overcompensate by grimacing at the poor guy, or glaring at him like he just pooped in your shoe. He didn't. He expressed interest and you should be honored whatever your opinion of him. I wonder sometimes if girls realize just how nastily they reject people in these little nonverbal exchanges, and how differently they handle staring when the person doing it is more to their liking. Reminds me of an SNL skit with Tom Brady where he lists off the 3 rules for guys to avoid committing sexual harassment: 1) be handsome 2) be attractive 3) don't be unattractive

Wow, not all shy people are cannibals. Treating them like cannibals doesn't exactly help bring them into the fold. Having become less shy over the years, I can say that sometimes you are better off not approaching the person because a botched attempt can ratchet up the awkwardness big time, to the point that you have to find a new place to go. Sometimes the response you get is less than cordial, and sometimes it's astoundingly mean. These days I'm more likely to try my luck anyway, but until people become (a lot) more respectful of those deemed undesirable I can't fault someone for just looking.

Which Palestine would that be, exactly? As long as there isn't actually a "Palestine" I don't think their rationale can be ignored or moved to a separate discussion. This would be more black and white if said people were on a equal footing with their neighbors. You can't have a set of rules that only one side has to follow. What would happen if people from Gaza started nonchalantly building houses on land that's supposed to be Israel's? The response would be violent, and it would involve more than random rockets because they have more than random rockets.

Ms. Coppola was off with a number of specifics (especially re the signage), but her overall sentiments are pretty widely held. Multiple design choices on the shelters seem like they were made without regard for the climate. Having used both new and old RTA shelters recently, I noticed no real difference in how much wind they block. So I can't say the new ones are colder... but they're absolutely positively not warmer, and that seems like it would be a leading consideration when replacing a series of structures in a northern town. Regardless of the benches' material, there aren't enough of them, and it isn't clear why that is. There appears to be room in the shelters for more seating. The benches in the old shelters are far more accomodating, so these could have been as well. What advantage is gained with the new ones? If there isn't any, the new ones represent backwards motion. The interior layout of the buses is questioned by just about everyone as soon as they first see it. The seats aren't big enough-- are these vehicles narrower than regular buses? If so then why, if not then why is every aspect of the interior narrower? These complaints seem pretty consistent, months after the service opened. I realize we can't just change out equipment at this point. But if nothing else can be done, the people within RTA who approved these designs need to look at their methods. It may be that the scoring system they use to evaluate designs is flawed and due for an update. Someone has got to say "Gee Bob, this new system seems dramatically less user friendly on a number of axes all at once. Is there anything we can do about that?"

That's great if people want to make sure we get something full-scale, didn't think that was going to be a problem. But if MMPI wants it on the mall then put it there. Despite their name, Greater Cleveland Partnership isn't a partner on this project but MMPI is. Why would Jackson want to get stuck with an obsolete complex on the mall? There's no other home-run redevelopment possibility for that complex since it happens to be a convention center that the city is built around. Put the convention center there and be done with it. Getting all of downtown functioning again will benefit Tower City much more than would sticking something extra directly onto it. The powers pushing the TC location could damage their long-term interests if they succeed in bogarting this project. At least Jackson is advocating a big picture approach.

Go off of Wade Park and you'll see even more. It's such an under rated, or discussed area. Indeed. It's astounding to me that any property near Rockefeller Park would ever be distressed, yet so many are. If I could pick one are in Cleveland to target for redevelopment this is it. Its location is perfect and it already has so much great architecture.

I've been so worried this would happen. Given the choice, what state legislature would favor pro-urban transit projects over anti-urban highways? None, particularly not states that have been red for a while and whose district boundaries favor exurban and rural interests. Unfortunately the Change we're looking for needs to come top-down from Washington. What Obama needs to address-- directly and aggressively-- is the tendency of state legislatures to neglect urban development. Block grants for "infrastructure" will only reinforce bad trends.

That being the case, it shouldn't be left to markets. Refurbishing all these old buildings would be a great jobs program and it would eliminate a barrier to getting retail back into the neighborhoods. I'd rather see that done than spend it on other public works. Nationalize the properties until the work is paid off, and pay it off slow to keep the rents way down. Tie it in with every small business incubator program. Get national chains into the larger buildings in areas where they're underrepresented. Money talks to companies that wouldn't look at a neighborhood before. Government help should only be available to retailers that are willing to provide commerce in inner cities. There's about to be a wave of retail closures and it could be an opportunity to restructure in favor of neglected areas.

Also, I used to work for a company that hauled coke out of that Mittal facility when it was LTV. Every once in a while, I got to go in there and push a big red button that would set all this giant machinery in motion to pile up the coke. That part was awesome. Getting laid off when LTV liquidated was not awesome.

Everything west of the river (including Parkman Rd/422) is getting pretty nasty. It's full of abandoned strip plazas that I'm glad you didn't photograph. As for 169, it is burned into my mind as the ultimate "bad road." That DeForest area was in my school district. My parents' neighborhood, a couple miles north, is also deteriorating rapidly. Several houses are now abandoned, some have been burglarized and the one next door had a stolen car driven through the front wall. And this is a hi-end suburban area built in the 70s.

Too Much Joy is the greatest band that has ever existed. They were around in the 80s and 90s. It is impossible (for me) not to be excited and happy after hearing a few tracks of them. Just got my first MP3 player for Christmas. I've never downloaded a song before and until recently was still making mix tapes. I'm about to go foraging the internet for every song I've ever liked.

For the record, only about half of Warren looks like this-- the southern and western parts. Most of the eastern half is nicer, reminiscent of Parma or Eastlake. Parts of the north end are downright charming. The whole town does, however, get worse every year.

Cool thread. That is either Meander Reservior or Lake Milton that I-80 crosses, maybe both, but not Mosquito. Mosquito Reservoir is NE of Warren, and I believe SR 5 or 88 crosses it.

I worry that RTA underestimates demand by having the drivers count. I hope/assume there are other ways demand is measured, and that they account for the number of times drivers wave people by or don't beep the thing when I show my CSU-pass. There are cameras on every bus, so they can compare video tallies with official counts and get a standard figure for overage. The routes I ride, including the E-line, are usually pretty much full. Sometimes they're crazy full, which is when drivers seem a lot less likely to charge or count riders. They're all about not getting behind, and I agree. Just go. Executive decision. That said, I would hate to see a service cut back or an expansion delayed because of underestimated demand.

Someone should do a travel guide highlighting these kind of places. I think there's a market, at least for reading about it.

It was funny when the sign said running till 11 was for night-owls or hep-cats or something. That would apply if they ran till 3am, not 11. Referring to 11 as night-owl territory evinces a disconnect with modern social existence. Somebody in advertising there must be aware this isn't Utah.

There is no reason the government couldn't modify those executive compensation contracts. What a bunch of bull. "Change in control" provisions are a euphamism for golden parachute.

I love the trolley service. It adds a lot to downtown. I would also love to see a trolley that goes across one bridge, down/up W25th, and back over the other bridge. It would help promote Ohio City as an aspect of downtown. There are plenty of buses and a train that go there, but the free trolleys are really helpful for visitors and for business.

That's what I'm saying they should do, that's what I meant by different places/ways.

I'm unclear as to the connection between bad exurban housing design and managing the money supply. If you mean sprawl construction should stop, I'm all for that. But it will leave us with a lot of unemployed people in the building trades. That says to me that we should press forward with construction, just do it in different places and different ways. No construction can take place if someone's bank or someone's boss is sitting on all of the money. To the extent that productive activity is keyed to credit, credit needs to flow. I don't think the world should grind to a halt so people can get a patronizing lecture about how to live.

I'm suggesting that the effect of said loss on the world is at least somewhat arbitrary. Previously, people "had" lots of fake money that did not exist. Currently, they no longer do. But they never did. Nothing has actually taken place. We still have just as much productive capacity as we did a year ago. People didn't die off or suddenly get dumber. Equipment still works the same way. Materials and fuels continue to exist. If we spend a year doing nothing because a bunch of fake value disappeared, there is no dumber race of beings in the universe. The only real loss I see is among people who sacrificed actual labor/cash/stuff to buy real estate or securities at inflated prices. I wouldn't mind seeing that rectified. It isn't like their money vanished. All of it was paid to someone. Send them a bill.

What David said. We don't not need to build things, we need projects like the flats to get going again. Bailing out the banks themselves was supposed to free up credit for that sort of thing. If the govt has to bail out the banks and their customers too, then what are the banks doing with the money they already got? We went from "everyone thought real estate was worth more than it was" to "there's no money in the world anymore." That doesn't make sense. Money didn't just catch fire and disappear. The physical world is no different than it was before.